From an article1:
Beyond trade, everywhere we look corporations are controlling our lives from cradle to grave. Tens of thousands of people are fired or harassed every year when they try to form unions, despite a public policy articulated by the elected representatives that collective bargaining is a public good because it advances the welfare of society. Why? Because, in effect, corporations have unregulated, oppressive power in the workplace—they can stifle free speech, intimidate their workers, manipulate union representation elections and, yet, suffer virtually neither financial penalties nor public scorn in the process.
Forty-three million Americans have no health insurance because corporations have scuttled any plan that might reduce huge profit centers; Medicare, the social pact we made with our elderly, is about to be snared into the profit-driven marketplace. The once-normal expectation of a secure pension is gone because corporations are looting cash-rich funds or dropping retirement plans. And we're all now familiar with the tale of the nation's tax laws which encourage corporations to set up shop abroad in order to escape paying even minimal taxes. Our expectations about what to expect in our lives have been lowered because corporations have dictated their agenda.
We have before us a teachable moment during which we can ignite a public debate on what should be the limits of corporate power in the 21st Century. Obviously, corporations are a mechanism to provide jobs. We should figure out sensible ways to engage in commerce, whether between states or between countries. But, under what terms? Right now, citizens everywhere are forced to adapt their lives to fulfill the demands of corporations. Isn't that the wrong relationship? Shouldn't the citizens of the country be able to dictate under what terms companies operate, terms that emphasize a rising standard of living, not one that declines with every trade agreement or boardroom decision to shutter a plan because people in another corner of the world will work for substandard wages in conditions no human being should endure? (
link)
One of the problems with some libertarians is that they seem to think that governments can do no good while corporations can do no wrong, so governments should be restricted and coporations given free rein. But corporations given free rein are just as likely to do wrong and harm people as governments. See the end of this article about power vested in the hands of a few.
Complete text of the article,
Who's The Boss, by Jonathan Tasini
The central issue at the heart of the NAFTA debacle is the abuse of corporate power. At no time in our recent history have a handful of people, unaccountable to the citizenry, amassed enough power to manipulate our economic system to meet their demands, even when it makes no fiscal sense and harms millions of people. Corporations have become our modern-day kings, ruling without the tiresome exercise of popular election.
We have become party to trade agreements that not only hurt working Americans but also relinquish your power as a citizen to shape government action. As Sarah Anderson, director of the Institute for Policy Studies' Global Economy Project, points out, a key provision of NAFTA "restricts the ability of governments to protect the environmental and public welfare and to ensure that foreign investment supports social, economic and environmental goals." In fact,investors have made use of the 'investor-state' provision of NAFTA to aggressively challenge a wide range of laws or regulations that they feel interfere with their profits." In other words, if a corporation does not like a rule passed by your elected government, it can have that rule thrown out. That's already a critical piece of the World Trade Organization. Corporations want those very same rules to be part of the Free Trade Area of the Americas.
Beyond trade, everywhere we look corporations are controlling our lives from cradle to grave. Tens of thousands of people are fired or harassed every year when they try to form unions, despite a public policy articulated by the elected representatives that collective bargaining is a public good because it advances the welfare of society. Why? Because, in effect, corporations have unregulated, oppressive power in the workplace—they can stifle free speech, intimidate their workers, manipulate union representation elections and, yet, suffer virtually neither financial penalties nor public scorn in the process.
Forty-three million Americans have no health insurance because corporations have scuttled any plan that might reduce huge profit centers; Medicare, the social pact we made with our elderly, is about to be snared into the profit-driven marketplace. The once-normal expectation of a secure pension is gone because corporations are looting cash-rich funds or dropping retirement plans. And we're all now familiar with the tale of the nation's tax laws which encourage corporations to set up shop abroad in order to escape paying even minimal taxes. Our expectations about what to expect in our lives have been lowered because corporations have dictated their agenda.
We have before us a teachable moment during which we can ignite a public debate on what should be the limits of corporate power in the 21st Century. Obviously, corporations are a mechanism to provide jobs. We should figure out sensible ways to engage in commerce, whether between states or between countries. But, under what terms? Right now, citizens everywhere are forced to adapt their lives to fulfill the demands of corporations. Isn't that the wrong relationship? Shouldn't the citizens of the country be able to dictate under what terms companies operate, terms that emphasize a rising standard of living, not one that declines with every trade agreement or boardroom decision to shutter a plan because people in another corner of the world will work for substandard wages in conditions no human being should endure?
The first challenge is to change the language and break through the narcotic of television, MTV and the torrent of non-spam information pouring through the Internet. I'm reminded of the childhood ditty "the knee bone's connected to the thigh bone, the thigh bone's connected to the..." We have to start by creating a mental picture that connects the dots for people by following the money and power trail.
In the same way that the battle over NAFTA 10 years ago brought together people who had a wide variety of ideological labels, the specter of abusive corporate power has the potential to shape a similar coalition. Liberals, progressives and true conservatives should be arguing together that Thomas Jefferson and James Madison would view NAFTA-style trade agreements as abrogating the rights of citizens and failing to tend to the needs of the people. And though I do not uncritically embrace the Framers, many of whom were slave-owners, as the all-knowing seers of truth and justice, it's hard not to believe that, having rid themselves of the British monarchy, they would not see today's corporate stranglehold on our lives as unacceptable concentrations of power in the hands of the few, no less abhorrent than power vested in a tyrannical king, and, as a result, as unpatriotic and un-American.
reference=http://www.tompaine.com/feature2.cfm/ID/9413
The Clipboard: Who's The Boss